Who's Online (0)

Should I get a d7100 or wait until end of month for d610

I currently have a d5000. 2 kit lenses 18-55 and 70-200. I recently purchased 1.8 50mm, and sigma 2.8 24-70 lense. I primarly shoot dogs stationary and in movement. I also like to do landscapes and portraits. I did purchase a d600 refurbished and first pic testing had over 12 oil spots. I returned it, and found out about the d610. I want to purchase the Nikon 2.8 70-200 lense as well. the difference is almost 1,000.00 between d7100 and d610. the Nikon 2.8 70-200 will be around 2300.00. is there going to be that much difference with the d610 vs the d7100. I have just started being asked to do photos for people and consider this a serious hobby doing photos most everyday. Thanks for any suggestions.

The D610 has been announced today and dealers are taking predelivery orders with delivery in October.

Now all you need to determine if you want DX or FX format...D7100 or D610. Physical size is about the same. Go to the Nikon web site and run a comparison between the two models for weight, dimensions, and feature comparison.

I would buy a D7100 over a D610 without any further deliberation. I have owned more thousands of dollars in cameras in the past than many on these various sites. I would follow the D610 reviews for a while before buying one for sure. A deal breaker for me would be the focus grid problem with the D610. Apparently the engineering, manufacture difficulties in changing the grids to a wider pattern was too much at this price point.

I have photographed dogs in motion and posed and regret the fortune I spent quality hunting with big gear (large and medium format). I did achieve some pretty interesting images in this period but when I compare my Nikon film camera images that were being used to meter reading when using the big rigs the HUGE investment was to say the least one of the WORST chapters in my life.

The D7100 is the single best camera I have ever owned. I would stick with the better laid out focus grids and all that. I think this bigger is better trend is good for pumping up a camera and lens package price and very little more. I also would challenge those who are advising you to do the dog photos in FX over DX. What credentials do they have doing what you are focusing on? My guess they have VERY little experience photographing what you are setting out to. If you could get a walk through of what I accomplished in this dog arena which by the way was everything from AKC National Championship and pure bread world records in racing, the more expensive formats were a total waste. I also would strongly caution the $850 difference in the D7100 vs the D610. That is no system cost comparison. That is simply a camera body difference.

Thanks for the input again everyone. Right now photographing dogs in motion with the dx and 70-200 kit lense is challenging already and I already have to do some post production cropping. You can only get so close in these situations and do not have the ability to get closer or to position yourself elsewhere. This is a concern of going full frame having to do more cropping. I guess I could also purchase a 2x for the lense as well. thanks again.

if you need the reach then the D7100 with double the MP over your D5000 would help a lot not counting the much better AF which is even better than the D610.

Moments of Light - D610 D7K S5pro 70-200f4 18-200 150f2.8 12-24 18-70 35-70f2.8 : C&C very welcome! Being a photographer is a lot like being a Christian: Some people look at you funny but do not see the amazing beauty all around them - heartyfisher.

I am in a somewhat similar situation wondering whether a 610/600 would be a worthy investment as a D7000 owner. Like you I shoot near max distance (300mm on a DX). The 7000 is great and really maybe I just need a better lens instead of a better camera. Maybe I'll continue to save up for an 800 unless there are unbelievable 610/600 offers...

Right now photographing dogs in motion with the dx and 70-200 kit lense is challenging already and I already have to do some post production cropping. .

I don't know how much you charge /make. but if you are looking at doing this professionally and can change a sensible rate, , then the kit you need is a D4 and the amazing latest 80 -400 ( here at NRF we love spending other peoples money

D7100......before purchasing a D610, i would wait for about three months to see if Nikon fixed it. Nikon currently has very little credibility, and an unknown response to problems with new cameras. The D600 fiasco has made it IMO almost mandatory for a new camera to prove itself before I would recommend one to anyone. And, when/if a D400 appears, this again will have to demonstrate to me it is not a dog like the D600.

If anybody here could post two images - one taken with the 24mp D7100 and one taken with a 24mp D600 of the same subject using a decent lens zoomed to give the exact same image size on the sensor for comparison purposes, that would be excellent.

Moments of Light - D610 D7K S5pro 70-200f4 18-200 150f2.8 12-24 18-70 35-70f2.8 : C&C very welcome! Being a photographer is a lot like being a Christian: Some people look at you funny but do not see the amazing beauty all around them - heartyfisher.

:-) I think IQ is only a small part of what needs to be compared between these 2 systems. IF iq is to be compared then it should be between 2 options with equal price(given that budget is a concern by the OP). Therefore the Lens on the D610 will be a lower quality. Furthermore, the primary requirements highlighted by the OP is the focus speed(the AF of the D7100 being more advance than the D610) and the reach ( OP mentioned cropping needed ) and not so much the IQ. That is what I gathered from the OP and her/his subsequent responses.

If price is not a concern then the D4 and the 200-400 would probably be the best kit for the job ;-)

Question for the OP.. what "70-200 kit lense" ?

Post edited by heartyfisher on October 2013

Moments of Light - D610 D7K S5pro 70-200f4 18-200 150f2.8 12-24 18-70 35-70f2.8 : C&C very welcome! Being a photographer is a lot like being a Christian: Some people look at you funny but do not see the amazing beauty all around them - heartyfisher.

A D4 with a 200-400 Nikkor for shooting dogs like Brenda is doing? One PROBLEM is you are shooting from the sidelines like at a AKC sanctioned show? The D7100 with a 70-300VR is a far more practical rig. I asked a lady who has owned dogs, photographed them, sold them, and won the biggest titles which can be won. Her reaction is that the D4 and a 200-400 Nikkor is a huge rig and NOT appropriate. I would caution advising NR posters with excellent objectives to buy the biggest, heaviest, and just possible not the best rig for the job.

I would myself shoot with a D7100 HANDHELD. Since I have done this with cameras far MORE expensive than the D4 and the 200-400 Nikkor I think this is the voice of experience. Her target is clients who want to see their dogs photographed right, but the limitation is none of them are operating on an unlimited budget and the the D7100 with a 70-300VR is an incredibly capable rig with quite a bit lighter weight and still very good photo quality. My large format photos of dogs do get some use many years later but in retrospect I'd far rather do this with 35mm.

IF she HAD to do this same work with FX Nikon I would recommend the D800 and the capable 80-400VR. The reason to AVOID the 200-400 is total lack of wider which might be required for some of her shots. Brenda might also find that having her current rig with her as a back up body with the wider lens might be very useful.Lastly I DO NOT enjoy spending someone else's money! One of the BEST things that can be gained on this NR site is collective wisdom of some very veteran photographers and pick and chose from their advice. I have never owned a D4 and the 200-400 Nikkor lens but have shot quite a few photos with them and seen the results along with mine from the same venues. It is this that I base my comments on concerning the photos she is after. LASTLY let me make it very CLEAR that when you need 200-400 focal range the D4 and the 200-400VR is about the best money can buy. My reservation concerns itself with I do not think that narrow long throw range is appropriate to her mission. Photobug's last input I see on this topic is quite good. The D7100 is THE best all around choice. The trouble is I owned that exact lens and when the teleconverters had to be used the overall results got beaten by the 70-300 on the same camera (Nikon F5 to date my involvement). Today I'd just take a D7100 the 70-300VR Nikkor and something else for wider maybe even the 18-105VR

Thanks to everyone's advice in this forum. I was really leaning towards buying an FX Nikon, but received some great advice that the type of shooting I do (long tele) is best done with a DX. I am now a proud owner of my third Nikon camera (the D7100) and will be generously donating my D7000 to a lucky family member along with some of my less used lenses. (FYI my other Nikon is the 1V1).

Now here's a question for indoors sports: is it better to pony up the money for the $2K+ 2.8 zoom or is the new 4 zoom sufficient with the 7100? My pics on the slow 70-300 5.6 zoom at high ISO with the 7000 were quite good, so I am leaning towards the 4 zoom given that it weighs less and is shorter but maintains the same IQ as the 2.8. I will not be using it for the fastest action shots, as I have an 85 1.4 when super high shutter speeds are needed. Any advice? The other thing I was think about is waiting for the updated 300 4 prime, which hopefully (fingers crossed) will be out soon.

If the distance to your subject is reasonable, thus allowing for good lighting, the F/4 lenses, like the new 70-200 will serve you well. However, to hedge against higher ISO settings, then 2.8 lenses are the way to go. It is worth mentioning that the focus speed of 2.8 are faster than primes with an aperture of 1.4. Keep that in mind should you find that your AF becomes an issue in getting the shot you seek.

I have been having the same debate with myself (after having been burned on the D600 fiasco). I recently accepted a refund from Nikon on my D600 and have been waiting for some more tests & reviews on the D610 while also considering the D7100. My bigger concerns with the D7100 is the buffer size and noise at higher ISO's (I do some sports photography, sometimes in low light). I only have 1 lens (the 28-300 f/3.5-5.6G ED VR). If I stick with the D610 plan I am stuck with only the 1 lens as I cannot afford another one now. If I step back to the D7100 I could afford to pick up a 2nd lens (likely something wide) with the leftover refund money from Nikon. In addition to some sports I also do some stock photography (home studio - lots of food & some isolations) where low / no noise is a must. WWYD? I am currently camera-less and the wait for more tests on the D610 is KILLING ME!!

I think I would see what tests are available today, and if they all passed my specifications, then I would get the D610. Then I could use my existing lens and still get pretty wide shots.

If you decide to get the D7100, then you can shoot jpg for sports so the buffer wouldn't be an issue. It gets up to 7fps in 1.3x crop mode. I haven't pushed my D7100 ISO very high and looked at it on the computer, but 1100 looks great to me. If you decide that you love the camera, then you could sell the 28-300 for a DX 18-200 (I would think the IQ would be similar, but I haven't checked).

I ended up purchasing the D7100. should be here Friday. B&H photo had good camera only kit with some really good accessories. I have debated over 5 months on this. Everyone has provided good insight and I can continue to use some of my beginner lenses if needed. I am high enthusiast but not getting paid yet for any of the photos I have done for people. I believe this D7100 will be a significant step up from the D500 and my new lenses 50mm 1.4 and 2.8 24-70 lense. I still have to purchase the 2.8 70-200 and this will give me some savings towards that lense. a lot of my shots are from distance and I believe the crop factor will help me vs the full frame. A lot of people have expressed the d7100 being a great camera. big price difference to the d610 900.00 and this can be used towards purchasing glass which I heard is important vs. continuation of updates of cameras every 2 or so years. this update of the camera has been 4 yrs or so. thanks for everyone's input.